Potential up to 2,000 job losses at Alstom Derby

[Energy]

But the questions are, does Alstom use a robust, well written code base, including the reuse of reliable code in its own products, unlike the former Bombardier’s and since the takeover by Alstom, given that it evidently doesn’t work, how much chance is there of Alstom pulling the plug on this worthless outsourcing experiment and replacing the software on the Aventras or any new build stock based on something of it’s own that works?

Alstom is using its own software and hardware on future ETCS electrostar retrofits, so expect Alstom software on future Derby products.

Most manufacturers have had software issues, the 700s and FLIRTs weren't issue-free but they got pretty quickly resolved while Bombardier took over a year on the 710s suggesting the problems were far deeper.

I’ve been told that the Desiros still run on Windows 3.1, so would the Siemens attitude to reusing well written code that works be very different?

If your software is laid out well into modules then it's very easy to reuse code, it's very difficult to reuse code and maintain code when it isn't laid out well.

Moving OS depends on what technologies they've used but often isn't that difficult if the underlying technologies can be compiled for different OSes. Bombardier moved to Linux for the 379s (not 387s AFAIK) and early Aventras (initial 345 code).

Keeping it on early Windows (very common for TMS, Alstom did the same) is minimal work but can cause issues with hardware obsolescence and support from Microsoft ending as well as licensing from Microsoft.

 

[Chester1]

The real issue with Derby is not so much the factory but the potential loss of UK engineering & development skills. Litchurch Lane is the only factory left that produces British designed trains, which incidentally they did also export in 2008 to South Africa in kit form.

Derby has had some initial reliability issues, but these do bed in, and to be fair plenty of the introduction issues are not really due to any fault with the trains themselves. Hitachi/CAF haven't exactly filled themselves with glory either with their naff cheaply built trains. So I'm not quite sure why the Aventra gets so much hate because IMO they are a pretty solid quality build that will easily outlast the rather flimsy & troublesome IETs or Civitys.

For HS2, Bombardier/Alstom are investing in new bogie production at Crewe, Hitachi have installed a new body welding line, and as usual the clueless government then pull the rug from under their feet by delaying the program. It's hardly a good advert for anyone thinking of investing in UK manufacturing. It's a similar picture in defense where BAE have pretty much given up on investing in the UK because they got shafted too many times. And Rishi just pulled the rug from under the UK car industry for the sake of short term political expediency.

Does the R&D and manufacturing need to be done at the same site? What happened to Talgo's plans for an R&D site in Chesterfield?

 

[Sonik]

Seriously? The 720s on the GE are all knocking and rattling with rock hard Kiel seating. You will soon see on the WCML these are a major downgrade from the sturdy Desiros. The only quality trains of recent years have been the 70x Desiro City fleet and the Stadlers, and the Desiro City is a poor spec otherwise it would be an excellent train with proper 2+2 seats, tables, armrests and carpets.

I was talking about the train itself not the interior which is down to DfT or the TOC. As you pointed out, even the sturdy Desiro gets spoiled by cheap seats. Try and find a rattle in a 345 with a properly specified fit out.

The Aventra is quite clearly a better built train than either the IET or the Civity. If Alstom can address the software and QA issues (as appears to be happening) it will be a very solid platform.

 

[43096]

Alstom is using its own software and hardware on future ETCS electrostar retrofits, so expect Alstom software on future Derby products.

It looks like Alstom is, sensibly, abandoning the ex-Bombardier ETCS kit. They are also now homolgating TRAXX3 locos with Alstom ETCS equipment. It would appear the current/old setup was a big part of the issues that have plagued the new generation TRAXX, which have resulted in Siemens cleaning up the loco market in recent years.

 

[507020]

Well the main reason for such outsourcing was costs I assume so the real question is are the delay penalties and threat of more losses in the right amount to force the above and proper change you mention.

Ontop of that how much would it cost and time was take to reinstate an in-house software spartment and Co again as I assume they got rid of most of that department and staff.

Penalties for delays entering service and software related unreliability ought to be set high enough so as to force the manufacturer to retain an in house software development team, who are capable of preventing the issues which existed at Bombardier.

The creation of an in house software development team on a par with the best private manufacturers is perhaps the single biggest hurdle to the reinstatement of a state monopoly, because obviously BREL has not had the benefit of all the advances in technology since the 1990s (which is why the sentiment of simply “bring back BR” unfortunately carries little weight)

This needn’t be the biggest issue since Siemens at Goole and imports from Stadler are quite capable, but with CAF, Hitachi and what is now Alstom are less straightforward.

Alstom is using its own software and hardware on future ETCS electrostar retrofits, so expect Alstom software on future Derby products.

Most manufacturers have had software issues, the 700s and FLIRTs weren't issue-free but they got pretty quickly resolved while Bombardier took over a year on the 710s suggesting the problems were far deeper.

That does sound like a better solution from Alstom, rather than trying to patch in some cases unusable Bombardier software. Does that mean ETCS fitted Electrostars will eventually be stripped of all problematic Indian-developed software in favour of standard code from Alstom?

I am quite aware that Stadler’s 777s are experiencing software issues, but I do have some confidence that Stadler is capable of resolving them, more than Bombardier was with the Aventras. The thing to remember is that all manufacturers now have the ~35 year lifetimes of their products to theoretically resolve any initial software issues, however it remains to be seen whether software maturity will be prioritised long term.

If your software is laid out well into modules then it's very easy to reuse code, it's very difficult to reuse code and maintain code when it isn't laid out well.

Moving OS depends on what technologies they've used but often isn't that difficult if the underlying technologies can be compiled for different OSes. Bombardier moved to Linux for the 379s (not 387s AFAIK) and early Aventras (initial 345 code).

Keeping it on early Windows (very common for TMS, Alstom did the same) is minimal work but can cause issues with hardware obsolescence and support from Microsoft ending as well as licensing from Microsoft.

This bad practice is one of the key aspects that make the software effectively unusable. I can’t imagine such badly written software being easy to debug either.

Applications such as a TMS should be using Linux for obvious reasons, but acknowledging that Linux itself is by no means perfect.

 

[NSEWonderer]

Indeed

 

[Sonik]

Does the R&D and manufacturing need to be done at the same site? What happened to Talgo's plans for an R&D site in Chesterfield?

Not necessarily. But the likes of Hitachi, Siemens and CAF don't do much (if any) engineering here because they already have it set up in their home market

Derby has an illustrious technical legacy that goes back to BREL days, and it's a disgrace that this has been largely squandered, and we are now left with many instances of clearly inferior imported knockoff designs

For example the Flex-Eco inner frame bogies that Hitachi, Siemens, CAF have all now copied were developed under BREL, same with Alan Wickens yaw damper that keep falling off non UK designed trains, probably because the designers don't have sufficient understanding of the dynamics.

 

[Energy]

Penalties for delays entering service and software related unreliability ought to be set high enough so as to force the manufacturer to retain an in house software development team, who are capable of preventing the issues which existed at Bombardier.

This is up to those ordering stock.

The creation of an in house software development team on a par with the best private manufacturers is perhaps the single biggest hurdle to the reinstatement of a state monopoly, because obviously BREL has not had the benefit of all the advances in technology since the 1990s (which is why the sentiment of simply “bring back BR” unfortunately carries little weight)

It isn't actually that much of a hurdle, but it isn't cheap. Good programmers aren't difficult to hire but tend to come with deservedly high salaries and require good benefits. BREL would have to start from a new codebase, while it takes more time (and expense) it would have little technical debt. Experienced software project managers aren't particularly hard to come by.

A good modular software platform is actually quite a big advantage, as learned by recent rolling stock...

That does sound like a better solution from Alstom, rather than trying to patch in some cases unusable Bombardier software. Does that mean ETCS fitted Electrostars will eventually be stripped of all problematic Indian-developed software in favour of standard code from Alstom?

I'm not 100% sure but I'd expect fully Alstom ETCS equipment fitted separately to the current Bombardier/Adtranz HMI which is Windows-based (apart from 379s). The existing hardware isn't problematic so not much point in changing it.

Not necessarily.

But the likes of Hitachi, Siemens and CAF don't do much (if any) engineering here because they already have it set up in their home market

Siemens does actually do quite a bit of R&D in the UK, Siemens is known for being German but it is a fairly multinational company.

Derby has an illustrious technical legacy that goes back to BREL days, and it's a disgrace that this has been largely squandered, and we are now left with many instances of clearly inferior imported knockoffs.

For example the Flex-Eco inner frame bogies that Hitachi, Siemens, CAF have now copied were developed under BREL, same with Alan Wickens yaw damper that keep falling off non UK designed trains, probably because the designers don't have sufficient understanding of the dynamics.

When Siemens started on the 450s they went to a lot of effort to accommodate the British track condition and had 3rd rail installed at Wildenrath to do extensive testing. Hitachi did get some UK 750v experience with remotoring the 465s but it doesn't compare.

When the 450s had issues with rolling contact fatigue causing excessive track wear Siemens did fix it with variable stiffness bushes (though not clear who paid) while when the yaw dampener bracket cracking was found on 800s Hitachi quickly blamed UK track conditions rather than an inadequately designed train.

For the Desiro Cities Siemens did want to use the Flexx Eco bogey but Bombardier was unwilling to license it.

 

[Chester1]

Not necessarily. But the likes of Hitachi, Siemens and CAF don't do much (if any) engineering here because they already have it set up in their home market

Derby has an illustrious technical legacy that goes back to BREL days, and it's a disgrace that this has been largely squandered, and we are now left with many instances of clearly inferior imported knockoff designs

For example the Flex-Eco inner frame bogies that Hitachi, Siemens, CAF have all now copied were developed under BREL, same with Alan Wickens yaw damper that keep falling off non UK designed trains, probably because the designers don't have sufficient understanding of the dynamics.

I don't value the nostalgia aspect. I remember when Rover collasped and it deamed to be terrible. I am sure for local people it was but nationally Longbridge was absolutely dwarfed by the Nissan factory in Sunderland which didn't exist when Longbridge was in its prime. Alstom has already closed one major BREL site and I think they will eventually close another. I hope that HS2 is sufficient to keep Derby open until 2030s and that Hitachi, CAF and Siemens are doing more advanced work at their UK sites by then.

 

[507020]

Derby has an illustrious technical legacy that goes back to BREL days, and it's a disgrace that this has been largely squandered, and we are now left with many instances of clearly inferior imported knockoff designs

This was the real loss of privatisation. A few TOCs could be renationalised tomorrow and merged with Network Rail, but doing so would not recreate BREL, or indeed the engineering capabilities of the pre-nationalisation companies it formed from.

I do hope that any attempts to regain this lost technical expertise would not necessitate starting at the very beginning with Stephenson’s rocket and take 200 years.

It isn't actually that much of a hurdle, but it isn't cheap. Good programmers aren't difficult to hire but tend to come with deservedly high salaries and require good benefits. BREL would have to start from a new codebase, while it takes more time (and expense) it would have little technical debt. Experienced software project managers aren't particularly hard to come by.

A good modular software platform is actually quite a big advantage, as learned by recent rolling stock...

My understanding was that finding even 1 or 2 competent programmers is almost impossible, such is the demand for them, because schools do not teach programming despite how sought after they are, or the fact that the world will all but implode without enough of them and this has given rise to a number of incompetent programmers producing poor quality code. Adobe for example is also guilty of allowing cheap outsourcing to India to ruin its products.

And I for example have zero experience as a programmer and it greatly annoys me that I am unlucky enough never to have had any opportunity to learn.

I'm not 100% sure but I'd expect fully Alstom ETCS equipment fitted separately to the current Bombardier/Adtranz HMI which is Windows-based (apart from 379s). The existing hardware isn't problematic so not much point in changing it.

Could the use of Linux on the 379s in contrast to the other Electrostars have contributed to them ending up off lease?

When Siemens started on the 450s they went to a lot of effort to accommodate the British track condition and had 3rd rail installed at Velim to do extensive testing. Hitachi did get some UK 750v experience with remotoring the 465s but it doesn't compare.

When the 450s had issues with rolling contact fatigue causing excessive track wear Siemens did fix it with variable stiffness bushes (though not clear who paid) while when the yaw dampener bracket cracking was found on 800s Hitachi quickly blamed UK track conditions rather than an inadequately designed train.

For the Desiro Cities Siemens did want to use the Flexx Eco bogey but Bombardier was unwilling to license it.

Did SWT not only go to Siemens because it perceived that a poor quality product had come out of Derby? It is obvious to any passenger that the original Desiros are a well designed train.

What about 3rd rail at Siemens’ own test track at RAF Wildenrath? I know both there and Velim have since been used for the 777s on 3rd rail.

And what actually are the inside frame bogies on the Desiro Cities then? They are actually compatible with British infrastructure, unlike the foreign designed bogies of CAF and Hitachi stock, with the cracks just being proof of incompatibility with the track geometry, that being their main problem, regardless of any other performance and certainly removable seats.

 

[Energy]

My understanding was that finding even 1 or 2 competent programmers is almost impossible, such is the demand for them, because schools do not teach programming despite how sought after they are, or the fact that the world will all but implode without enough of them and this has given rise to a number of incompetent programmers producing poor quality code. Adobe for example is also guilty of allowing cheap outsourcing to India to ruin its products

Schools do now teach programming from a fairly young age but programming is no different to maths in that it comes naturally to some more than others.

Could the use of Linux on the 379s in contrast to the other Electrostars have contributed to them ending up off lease?

It's not particularly difficult to keep them diagrammed away from other Electrostars, staff training and maintenance will be the same.

Did SWR not only go to Siemens because it perceived that a poor quality product had come out of Derby? It is obvious to any passenger that the original Desiros are a well designed train.

Money. CAF was the original favorite rolling stock manufacturer but FirstGroup decided that giving such a huge order to a foreign manufacturer would upset shareholders.

Siemens charges a premium but they usually work almost out of the box.

What about 3rd rail at Siemens’ own test track at RAF Wildenrath? I know both there and Velim have since been used for the 777s on 3rd rail.

Apologies, the 3rd rail for 450s was at Wildenrath

And what actually are the inside frame bogies on the Desiro Cities then?

SF7000, fairly typical lightweight inside-framed bogeys. They are considered better than Flexx Eco though I can't quite remember why (probably Siemens' harder suspension).

They are actually compatible with British infrastructure, unlike the foreign designed bogies of CAF and Hitachi stock, with the cracks just being proof of incompatibility with the track geometry, that being their main problem, regardless of any other performance and certainly removable seats.

The issues aren't actually at bogeys but with the mountings to aluminium bodies which tend to be too weak.

Its easy to put it down to foreign manufacturers built plenty of British trains have had issues, 158s, 175s and 323s all had issues.

---------------------------

And I for example have zero experience as a programmer and it greatly annoys me that I am unlucky enough never to have had any opportunity to learn.

I've separated this out as it isn't railway related but programming has a lot of online resources to help you self teach yourself, I recommend CodeCademy (free), Khan Academy (free but for more advanced), The Coding Train on YouTube and w3schools is a useful reference. DataCamp is also really good for databases and Python, while the first chapter is free the rest is paid (£10 for a year so not that expensive though I'd try the free first chapter).

For more advanced projects look at Flask (Python).

Teaching yourself programming isn't easy but it is not impossible.

 

[Sonik]

So regarding the announcement from Alstom, I'm now guessing that probably they got wind of the rumored government plans to curtail HS2 and made a preemptive response to try to avoid their order getting cut and/or the follow on orders for 2b.

It's not yet known what the government's actual plans will be, but whatever they are it's pretty clear that Rishi didn't do much thinking about what the various implications of any such decisions may be.

Deryshire has a number of marginal parliamentary seats now potentially facing not only the loss of promised HS2 service, but the threat of significant job losses too.

 

[Roast Veg]

Siemens does actually do quite a bit of R&D in the UK, Siemens is known for being German but it is a fairly multinational company.

Yes Siemens have a London software house for signalling software as well as TMS, that work on projects dished out by HQ. In C#, for those who are interested.

 

[NSEWonderer]

Yes Siemens have a London software house for signalling software as well as TMS, that work on projects dished out by HQ. In C#, for those who are interested.

Yep which is why they resolve issues very quickly with their UK stock for example.

 

[Snow1964]

I do wonder if the best political fudge (if the Government doesn't want lots of highly skilled jobs in Alstom suppliers in East Midlands to be lost) is a speculative order for middle of the market, the big gap between the IETs and local trains. Sufficient to keep factory going until HS2 production is live. I say speculative, but as DfT directs where trains go, not really ordering homeless trains.

That leaves a question of what could be built quickly, and will work out of the box. If it was me would be going for a UK body size version of Coradia Stream battery EMU, 200km/h (124mph) fitted out for the long regional routes, seats suitable for 3+ hour journeys.

Why would I build those rather than more Aventra, simple answer is they work, are reliable, Alstom has number of variations working well so negligible design time, software works, level boarding, and there are few routes crying out for that type of train, which makes cascades easy. Ultimately can release a few IETs doing semi-fast work, and replace 1980s life expired diesels. So not building trains that aren't going to be needed anyway. The last thing UK currently needs is more commuter EMUs.

The Press seem to be be suggesting if factory closed, whole supply chain is about 17,000 jobs. Electorate affected is probably nearer 35,000 (living with those), or 70,000 including family members (those with brother, son etc affected). Not great look in area with lots of marginal constituencies.

 

[Mikey C]

Did SWT not only go to Siemens because it perceived that a poor quality product had come out of Derby? It is obvious to any passenger that the original Desiros are a well designed train.

SWT originally ordered the 458s from Alstom (as in Metro Cammell). It was the massive problems with these that led them to go elsewhere. I don't know why they didn't then order Electrostars which already operated across the "Southern" network.

 

[43096]

Did SWT not only go to Siemens because it perceived that a poor quality product had come out of Derby? It is obvious to any passenger that the original Desiros are a well designed train.

The direct catalyst for going to Siemens was the "Alstom experience" with the 458s. Great train, but abysmal manufacturer support. Derby were also struggling at the same time, so not exactly a surprise they chose Siemens.

 

[Snow1964]

SWT originally ordered the 458s from Alstom (as in Metro Cammell). It was the massive problems with these that led them to go elsewhere. I don't know why they didn't then order Electrostars which already operated across the "Southern" network.

Angel had speculatively ordered 25 4car units, from memory 3 were fitted as dual voltage, next 3 were swapped to later batches, SWT converted 19 of the order into first 450s which heavily brought forward the build timescale.

I forget now what exactly happened to the other 6 speculative units, but I think they became part of the class 360 or 350 orders.

 

[172007]

Alstom is using its own software and hardware on future ETCS electrostar retrofits, so expect Alstom software on future Derby products.

Most manufacturers have had software issues, the 700s and FLIRTs weren't issue-free but they got pretty quickly resolved while Bombardier took over a year on the 710s suggesting the problems were far deeper.

If your software is laid out well into modules then it's very easy to reuse code, it's very difficult to reuse code and maintain code when it isn't laid out well.

Moving OS depends on what technologies they've used but often isn't that difficult if the underlying technologies can be compiled for different OSes. Bombardier moved to Linux for the 379s (not 387s AFAIK) and early Aventras (initial 345 code).

Keeping it on early Windows (very common for TMS, Alstom did the same) is minimal work but can cause issues with hardware obsolescence and support from Microsoft ending as well as licensing from Microsoft.

172/0 is Linux, well it comes up as Linux when the screen boots up.

 

[Energy]

Yes Siemens have a London software house for signalling software as well as TMS, that work on projects dished out by HQ. In C#, for those who are interested.

Knew they did signalling, didn't know they did TMS as well. Explains why Siemens UK stock gets fixed quickly. IIRC you can see a bit of their signaling work in a crossrail documentary.

is a speculative order for middle of the market, the big gap between the IETs and local trains. Sufficient to keep factory going until HS2 production is live. I say speculative, but as DfT directs where trains go, not really ordering homeless trains.

That leaves a question of what could be built quickly, and will work out of the box. If it was me would be going for a UK body size version of Coradia Stream battery EMU, 200km/h (124mph) fitted out for the long regional routes, seats suitable for 3+ hour journeys.

You don't order trains and find a route later. Northern and Chiltern have invitation to tenders out, GWR are working on it.

The direct catalyst for going to Siemens was the "Alstom experience" with the 458s. Great train, but abysmal manufacturer support. Derby were also struggling at the same time, so not exactly a surprise they chose Siemens.

It's quite incredible that the 390s do so well when they are washwood heath products of that era.

172/0 is Linux, well it comes up as Linux when the screen boots up.

Makes sense. The 172s are a bit varying, the /0s have 2 HMI screens, the /1s a singular HMI screen and the /2s and /3s have no HMI screens.

 

[Mikey C]

It's quite incredible that the 390s do so well when they are washwood heath products of that era.

The 95 tube stock trains are excellent as well. It's the Coradias and Junipers which have been problematic.

Similarly, the Derby built Movia trains for the Underground (2009, S7, S8) have settled in very well when compared to the Aventras.

 

[Snow1964]

Latest from Derby Telegraph Thursday morning

Hundreds of Derby workers at an under-threat factory have been told uncertainty remains over its future and that potential contracts currently available may not fill its three-year production gap. Up to 2,000 jobs at the city’s Alstom factory on Litchurch Lane could be at risk due to knock-on effects from delays to the building of the HS2 train line, it has been reported.

Trains for HS2 are set to be built at the Alstom site but delays in the construction of the train line mean manufacturing in Derby is likely to be pushed back until 2026. Other projects the company is working on are set to finish in around six months’ time – creating a production gap. Alstom bosses say they are working with the Government as well as local partners, including Derby City Council, to try to find potential short-term solutions.

Workers at Derby's Alstom factory told its future remains unclear

The Litchurch Lane firm is trying to fill a three-year production gap with new contracts

www.derbytelegraph.co.uk

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

That leaves a question of what could be built quickly, and will work out of the box. If it was me would be going for a UK body size version of Coradia Stream battery EMU, 200km/h (124mph) fitted out for the long regional routes, seats suitable for 3+ hour journeys.

Shrinking a European design for the UK is not at all trivial.
I don't know the Coradia Stream design, but Alstom often puts key equipment on the roof and uses articulated suspension.
It would essentially be a new train in the UK, and of course, much like the Bombardier Voyager, was not designed in Derby.

The Northern and Chiltern procurements are not at the tender stage, they are looking for "expressions of interest" and is well short of the ITT stage.
DfT simply don't do speculative orders (though in fact that's what kept the class 387 line going at Derby after Siemens won the Thameslink order).
You could even say the HS2 order is speculative, with all the project down-scoping going on since the 54-train "order" was awarded to Hitachi/Alstom.

 

[Snow1964]

Shrinking a European design for the UK is not at all trivial.
I don't know the Coradia Stream design, but Alstom often puts key equipment on the roof and uses articulated suspension.
It would essentially be a new train in the UK, and of course, much like the Bombardier Voyager, was not designed in Derby.

The Northern and Chiltern procurements are not at the tender stage, they are looking for "expressions of interest" and is well short of the ITT stage.
DfT simply don't do speculative orders (though in fact that's what kept the class 387 line going at Derby after Siemens won the Thameslink order).
You could even say the HS2 order is speculative, with all the project down-scoping going on since the 54-train "order" was awarded to Hitachi/Alstom.

Regarding the shrinking to UK size, something similar has happened for the Ireland order (but not Coradia stream)

In theory there are orders for upto 15 trains for LNER and lots of commuter EMUs for South Eastern parked indefinitely which could also be revived. Northern, Chiltern (and proposed GWR order) bit to early as you say.

But really depends on if Government has any sort of long term strategy rather than expensive start-stop policies. But I can't see how they could place an order at Derby then not get calls for unfair treatment from other factories at Newton Aycliffe, Newport, Goole etc

 

[RobShipway]

Regarding the shrinking to UK size, something similar has happened for the Ireland order (but not Coradia stream)

In theory there are orders for upto 15 trains for LNER and lots of commuter EMUs for South Eastern parked indefinitely which could also be revived. Northern, Chiltern (and proposed GWR order) bit to early as you say.

But really depends on if Government has any sort of long term strategy rather than expensive start-stop policies. But I can't see how they could place an order at Derby then not get calls for unfair treatment from other factories at Newton Aycliffe, Newport, Google etc

The only way that Derby would be able to continue, is for a current order for Aventra trains be extended to include more units for either C2C/Greater Anglia/South Western Railway and then these units then move on to say South Eastern. Similar things have been done before with orders for class 387 units which where initially ordered I believe as a follow on order to class 377 trains ordered, but ended up being used on Thameslink services to replace the class 319 units prior to the class 700 units arriving. However, difference being though that I believe Southern at that time was part of GOVIA Thameslink, so in essence where being ordered for the same train operator.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

But really depends on if Government has any sort of long term strategy rather than expensive start-stop policies. But I can't see how they could place an order at Derby then not get calls for unfair treatment from other factories at Newton Aycliffe, Newport, Google etc

Goole!
(What's in a "g"?- about $250 billion a year...)

 

[mpthomson]

It's fine our industry can still provide parts for engineering firms elsewhere, how hard can it be to export to (say) France as their not that far away... oh that happened, erm, no sorry I've got nothing.

Perhaps surprisingly exports to France (and the rest of the EU) have gone up since Brexit, even taking the post-pandemic bounce back into account.

 

[JonathanH]

Angel had speculatively ordered 25 4car units, from memory 3 were fitted as dual voltage, next 3 were swapped to later batches, SWT converted 19 of the order into first 450s which heavily brought forward the build timescale.

I forget now what exactly happened to the other 6 speculative units, but I think they became part of the class 360 or 350 orders.

The speculative build of 25 became the 21 360s with Great Eastern, with the other four converted to the first four Heathrow 360s.

The SWT 450s were a distinct order.

But really depends on if Government has any sort of long term strategy rather than expensive start-stop policies. But I can't see how they could place an order at Derby then not get calls for unfair treatment from other factories at Newton Aycliffe, Newport, Goole etc

Even if the Northern, Southeastern and GWR orders happen this decade, there could potentially be a further hiatus in the 2030s, as there is likely to be no need to start replacing the Electrostars and Desiros built in the early 2000s until the early 2040s.

The problem the railway has is that the rolling stock requirement doesn't match the life cycle of that rolling stock, so there will always be gaps and a start-stop policy.

I don't know why they didn't then order Electrostars which already operated across the "Southern" network.

The 31 December 2004 deadline to remove Mark 1 stock is likely to have meant that Electrostars couldn't be delivered to all three "Southern" operators in time. As it was, some slam door stock operated into 2005.

 

[Trainbike46]

Don't Northern require level boarding? Because I believe only Stadler offer that. Everyone else seems to be stuck with the traditional British layout, where the floor is always just a little too high.

All manufacturers offer level boarding on their european models (eg the Alstom Coradia for NS, the CAF civity for NS, and both siemens and stadler obviously). Stadler is just the only ones who have applied it to their UK designs so far - if it is a requirement, they can make a design that meets it (and tbh, if they won't make designs to meet customer requirements, then it's not surprising they're not doing well)

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Sep 2023 ==

You have to wonder how deeply this move has cost Bombardier / Alstom with regards to the software for the entire Aventra family. The fact that what, 4 years after the first 701 was supposed to enter traffic, none are still in service and a good proportion haven't even been accepted yet.

Siemens is an interesting one compared to some of the others actually - remember the diagram they produced for the TSGN 700 Desiro City contract. The assembly may have been in Germany, but the number of UK components was one of the highest, if not the highest, for a new train for some years. Even a lot of Siemens rolling stock uses cab modules assembled in the North East, then shipped out to Germany.

It's not just aventras, most bombardier products over the last ten years have been afflicted by software issues, regardless of whether the market was UK, north American, or European - it is probably a significant contributor to the situation leading to Bombardier rail being taken over by Alstom

 

[hwl]

All manufacturers offer level boarding on their european models (eg the Alstom Coradia for NS, the CAF civity for NS, and both siemens and stadler obviously). Stadler is just the only ones who have applied it to their UK designs so far - if it is a requirement, they can make a design that meets it (and tbh, if they won't make designs to meet customer requirements, then it's not surprising they're not doing well)

Step free entry can also be achieved with angled gap fillers mounted under the floor and current floor heights, there is no needed to lower floor heights as there are other ways. Alstom, Bombardier, CAF, Hitachi, Siemens and Talgo all had to develop angled gap fillers mounted under the floor and 1200mm floor heights for the HS2 rolling stock tender. (Stadler didn't...)